• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

One of the problems I have with watching the US gong show is trying to separate the things that Trump says into categories of (a) actual planks of intended policy, (b) fever dreams/cranial diarrhea or, (c) deliberately goading the other side just 'cuz.
 
I agree with the moral position.

The political position has to be practical.

A two-sided solution might be better, but is not strictly necessary. "Supply creates its own demand" in part means that a provider can prosper just by putting out something at a price point people find agreeable - even if it's disposable junk. If supply and demand side are both difficult to address, whether politically or practically, I expect the politically easier path to be taken no matter how much more practically difficult it is.
The US has a loooong history of the 'need' to a low cost supply of warm bodies to keep the gentry in the preferred life style. Slavery, mass legal immigration and now mass illegal immigration. It goes back over 175yrs, all the while the 'gentry' keeps chugging along.

Its bad optics for Trump and MAGA if the evening news is showing a number of white women from a Dallas gated suburb being cuffed into the back of some US law enforcement van after raiding their houses because of their illegal nannies, who where picked up an hour earlier at the bus stop, gave up their employers......

Or what if ICE swooped into a few large romaine lettuce farms on the first day of picking a new crop and arrested not only the illegal workers but the owners of the farms and their US citizen foremen who hired the illegals in the first place and work with them on a daily basis, ensuring that those farms crops are left to rot in the fields......
 
One of the problems I have with watching the US gong show is trying to separate the things that Trump says into categories of (a) actual planks of intended policy, (b) fever dreams/cranial diarrhea or, (c) deliberately goading the other side just 'cuz.
Pointless endeavour. Watch what gets signed and what the secretaries are doing.
 
The US has a loooong history of the 'need' to a low cost supply of warm bodies to keep the gentry in the preferred life style. Slavery, mass legal immigration and now mass illegal immigration. It goes back over 175yrs, all the while the 'gentry' keeps chugging along.
Substitute almost any country for "US". We have our own ways of bringing in warm bodies. How much does colour of law improve the moral position? It isn't only menial labourers whose potential compensation is undercut by programs to bring in foreign workers with lower expectations. Nevertheless I favour legal immigration, particularly of skilled workers who can be so employed.
 
A book review of "Leap of Faith" (by Mazarr). An amusing look back (for me). In parts over the top and full of subjective and colourful impressions, but a reminder of what the available alternatives can be like in American party politics, and of some of the factors contributing to where things lie today. Also, it touches on a handful of commonly held views that are myths.

The reviewer has a theory about "how we got Trump":

"A few years ago there was a fun meme where people collected reasons why other people said we got Trump. But no, seriously, that video is why you got Trump. Every respectable institution in American society compromised itself over Iraq, and every candidate in the 2016 election pretended it wasn’t a big deal, and then one man stood up on stage and told them all that they were full of shit. No, Iraq wasn’t the only issue where the views of the majority of Americans had literally no representation in either party (immigration and the degradation of the native lower class were also significant), but it was a big one. Economic theory tells us what happens next: when a monopoly gets lazy, it creates an opening for entrepreneurs. Trump spotted a big, wide open opportunity, and he seized it. That’s why you got Trump."
 
Can I put my elbows down now? I am getting tired and driving with my elbows up and mask on makes me look ridiculous...
;)
 
Mandan is a naturalized citizen, so of course Trump has mused out loud on camera about looking into that- on his usual “a lot of
People are saying…” standard.


Is it fair to assume an accusation like that is libelous?
 
The parade is held up as a facet of militarism, militarism is held up as a facet of fascism. Some people keep pointing to single events - some substantially and rightly alarming, and some frivolous - and fitting those to their cases for fascism. But most single events - like the parade - can be fitted to other cases; in this case, also populism, or even merely Trump's ego. Those willing to accept thin evidence in one case should not demand thorough evidence for another.

This echoes a point I have tried to make before. If we enumerated all possible characteristics of ideologies and all ideologies of interest and then mapped the former to the latter, there would be overlap: characteristics shared among ideologies. Oddball inconsistent events are not useful indicators, and a correct diagnosis requires all criteria be met. In particular, an authoritarian streak (and thus characteristics of authoritarianism) runs through most top-down ideologies and is to be expected in the people who seek high positions in those places.

Furthermore, people are always seizing on militating evidence and ignoring mitigating evidence. The administration basically ignored the "No Kings" protests. Real kings and tyrants don't tolerate that kind of open dissent. The administration will do as all administrations do and nominate judges and justices fitting particular models when nomination opportunities arise, but there is no serious indication that it is about to remove and replace the multitudes handing the administration setbacks and defeats in the courts. If the administration fires and replaces a senior military official, it will be for plausible cause - opponents will find reasons to disagree, but proponents will find reasons to agree - and not to wholesale replace the leadership with compliant GOFOs. The administration is going after media that the administration believes have presented information deceitfully, but it is not going after everyone who is a critic - even a severe critic; moreover, this is no different than the people in opposition who have their own ideas about what is malinformation and what should be done about it.

Armchair psychoanalysis over the internet is exceptionally rude behaviour. I can't identify with something unless you provide your definition. "MAGA" is one of those "I know it when I see it" things that people throw around, and I can't read minds. I lean libertarian in my ideals and classically liberal in the principles of governance I favour and conservative in my politics and I have no particular like or dislike of Trump. The administration is usefully resetting overreach by prior administrations, and applying pressures that have motivated Canada and other countries and many institutions and agencies and people to shake off over-reliance on the US. I don't suffer the collective whine of the fools who object to things done by this administration that were not equally resisted when done by prior administrations. I am scornful of the multitude of occasions on which people supposedly against the erosion of norms and decency take to eroding norms and decency to alleviate their frustration and policy differences. I have contempt for those trying to paint a picture of eroding democracy in the US when I compare it to our own governing structure and the respective numbers of positions and questions that are routinely put before voters.

Agreed.

Absolutely. Claiming the administration is fascist is a precursor to extreme opposition suitable to opposing fascism, or to encouraging others to so believe and act. What is allowable if you are really fighting Hitler, or even merely Mussolini?

The point I usually make is that what matters is whether it was done before. It is unreasonable to bitch when the other "team" applies in other ways the powers and capabilities that were convenient at one time for one's own "team". A detention camp or facility is a detention camp or facility. Facilitating large amounts of law-breaking creates the reasonable excuse for large amounts of law-enforcing. Exporting prisoners in one context opens the door to doing it in another. Following through on threats to find some ways to prosecute people, even if there is nothing in hand when the threat is made, invites retaliation. Creating invasive new powers for a particular envisioned purpose does not limit them from being applied otherwise. Acting unrestrained of the constitution etc invites more of the same.

As a practical political matter: if one party has repeatedly secured political advantage by bad behaviour and shows no sign of changing in the face of passive dismay, then tit-for-tat is fair until the first party exhibits evidence of genuine reform.

In most cases, yes. Their noses need to be rubbed in it until they really do follow through on their rhetoric - they're better than Trump, they don't go low, they want to preserve democratic norms and institutions, they themselves cut back some of the intrusive illiberal things they did etc, etc.

So basically, because pols you don’t like got away with small scale incompetence, corruption, criming and illiberality, you’re ok with the Trump Administration’s large scale incompetence, corruption, criming and illiberality. You think you’re pointing out hypocrisy, but it’s just excuse making.

“Why did you rob the bank?”

“Because the scoundrel, Jimmy, stole a chocolate bar from the store”.
 
Meanwhile, in the Oval Office...


It should no longer surprising or a mystery as to why the Trump admin leaks like a sieve every other day.
 

Or what if ICE swooped into a few large romaine lettuce farms on the first day of picking a new crop and arrested not only the illegal workers but the owners of the farms and their US citizen foremen who hired the illegals in the first place and work with them on a daily basis, ensuring that those farms crops are left to rot in the fields......
It might be better for our health. It seems about every six months we see a recall on Romaine because of salmonella.. Romaine lettuce is trying to kill us (or maybe it's a plot by the illegal immigrants. Hmmmm)
 
So basically, because pols you don’t like got away with small scale incompetence, corruption, criming and illiberality, you’re ok with the Trump Administration’s large scale incompetence, corruption, criming and illiberality. You think you’re pointing out hypocrisy, but it’s just excuse making.
Don't bother with that bullshit. Qualitative hand-waving about categories without specific examples is vacuous. I'm highly capable of assessing "small" and "large" for myself. All the attempts to salt pretexts for investigations were large. The widespread prolonged concerted efforts to conceal Biden's infirmity were large. The Iraq war was very, very large. The circumventions of customary protections for civil rights necessitated by the War on Terror are large.
 
The parade is held up as a facet of militarism, militarism is held up as a facet of fascism.
Are you using the passive voice to hide that this is a narrative of your construction? You held up militarism as a facet of fascism.

Some people keep pointing to single events
Some people like you? You who raised militarism as a facet of fascism and then clung to just the single example of the parade when presented a list of other examples? A non-exhaustive list includes domestic counter protest deployments of Army & Marines in LA, some of the self-congratulatory antics after a sortie to Iran, the massive pool of funding to expand & further militarize ICE via "Big Beautiful Bill", the threats of massive force against anyone who might interrupt the parade, the use of riot control agents to facilitate a bible photo in Lafayette Square.

The administration basically ignored the "No Kings" protests. Real kings and tyrants don't tolerate that kind of open dissent.
Speaking of some people pointing to single events. This seems to be all you've got on the idea that he's not really a tyrant. The lack of response to "No Kings" has more to do with the lack of endurance in the protest and not the benevolence of Trump. Yes the numbers were huge, but participants were out for a day and home for supper.

If the administration fires and replaces a senior military official, it will be for plausible cause - opponents will find reasons to disagree, but proponents will find reasons to agree - and not to wholesale replace the leadership with compliant GOFOs.
I mean, the administration has already done purges in the military leadership. Do you think just because you tell us things haven't happened that we all forget?


Absolutely. Claiming the administration is fascist is a precursor to extreme opposition suitable to opposing fascism, or to encouraging others to so believe and act. What is allowable if you are really fighting Hitler, or even merely Mussolini?
Should Americans be more amenable to being subjugated by a corrupt, nationalistic authoritarian because he is not Mussolini? Or because his racial bigotries are more directed to Africans and South Americans than toward some sub-set of Europeans?

I don't suffer the collective whine of the fools who object to things done by this administration that were not equally resisted when done by prior administrations.
Let's not pretend any previous administration came close to some of the things this current administration is doing. And, let's not pretend that you haven't whined and bemoaned far lesser transgressions from other administrations.

The point I usually make is that what matters is whether it was done before.
No. A wrong in the past does not justify repetition of the wrong in the present. That is an amoral philosophy.

It is unreasonable to bitch when the other "team" applies in other ways the powers and capabilities that were convenient at one time for one's own "team". A detention camp or facility is a detention camp or facility. Facilitating large amounts of law-breaking creates the reasonable excuse for large amounts of law-enforcing. Exporting prisoners in one context opens the door to doing it in another. Following through on threats to find some ways to prosecute people, even if there is nothing in hand when the threat is made, invites retaliation. Creating invasive new powers for a particular envisioned purpose does not limit them from being applied otherwise. Acting unrestrained of the constitution etc invites more of the same.

As a practical political matter: if one party has repeatedly secured political advantage by bad behaviour and shows no sign of changing in the face of passive dismay, then tit-for-tat is fair until the first party exhibits evidence of genuine reform.

In most cases, yes. Their noses need to be rubbed in it until they really do follow through on their rhetoric - they're better than Trump, they don't go low, they want to preserve democratic norms and institutions, they themselves cut back some of the intrusive illiberal things they did etc, etc.
This is insanity. You are advocating it is right and proper for political parties abuse power if another party did it before, and that punitive policies are a fine and normal thing. Continually raising the stakes, tit-for-tat in a race to the bottom that drags a whole country into its demise. There are norms that need to be upheld. There are norms that need to be rebuilt. And all parties have played a part in American democratic back-sliding. But, pretending Trump is continuing at the established standard is farcical. I mean, it is a great gas lighting narrative to say Trump is just doing what Democrats already did, but it is not true. If it is not your love for MAGA then maybe it is your hate for US Democrats that is enabling you to endorse some gross anti-democratic behaviours and human rights transgressions. Certainly, concentration camps to "own the libs" is not an okay thing.

The other side did not do something similar enough so that this is okay. And even if the other side did do something similar, this would not be okay.
 
In another drift into Idiocracy, they are now planning a UFC fight on the front lawn of the whitehouse for the 4th of July celebrations in 2026? Even MMA fans think that is dumb, and they are possibly the dumbest fan base.

Not even a joke anymore, the US really did elect President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho this time.

 
Are you using the passive voice to hide that this is a narrative of your construction? You held up militarism as a facet of fascism.
Militarism is definitionally a characteristic of fascism. If there is no militarism, it isn't fascism.
Some people like you? You who raised militarism as a facet of fascism and then clung to just the single example of the parade when presented a list of other examples? A non-exhaustive list includes domestic counter protest deployments of Army & Marines in LA, some of the self-congratulatory antics after a sortie to Iran, the massive pool of funding to expand & further militarize ICE via "Big Beautiful Bill", the threats of massive force against anyone who might interrupt the parade, the use of riot control agents to facilitate a bible photo in Lafayette Square.
Are you trying to invert the burden of proof? I'm not the one here, or elsewhere, that proposes the Army parade or a deployment of soldiers to support ICE or an illegal deportation is evidence that the US is heading toward fascism. One of my general points is that people read too much into events to fit their preconceptions.

The specific point about the parade was that it could also be construed as the "circuses" part of "bread and circuses" as evidence of plain ordinary populism. Or it could have been just a parade. I suppose what Trump is doing is mostly just populism with a bunch of aimless hip-shooting thrown in, but I don't care to try to make a solid case. Whatever it is, it's not going to become fascism.
Speaking of some people pointing to single events. This seems to be all you've got on the idea that he's not really a tyrant. The lack of response to "No Kings" has more to do with the lack of endurance in the protest and not the benevolence of Trump. Yes the numbers were huge, but participants were out for a day and home for supper.
If there are a bunch of important ways in which the administration and government and society as a whole are not trending fascist (eg. the coalescing of the judiciary, legislature, military, media, etc behind the great leader), and only scattered events that have other plausible explanations constituting weak evidence of characteristics of fascism if they are not widely and consistently repeated, then the most likely conclusion is the US is not becoming fascist.
Should Americans be more amenable to being subjugated by a corrupt, nationalistic authoritarian because he is not Mussolini? Or because his racial bigotries are more directed to Africans and South Americans than toward some sub-set of Europeans?
If that's what you see, then just go on seeing it. You're not really going to be moved. My points are for the benefit of people disinclined to be alarmist.
Let's not pretend any previous administration came close to some of the things this current administration is doing. And, let's not pretend that you haven't whined and bemoaned far lesser transgressions from other administrations.
I pretend nothing. Your beef here is just disagreement over subjectivity. I have repeatedly raised the things that should be categorized as grave abuses and mistakes.
No. A wrong in the past does not justify repetition of the wrong in the present. That is an amoral philosophy.
When I expound a "tit-for-tat" position, I frame it in the context of politics and political norms, not morality or ethics. Is that clear enough?
This is insanity. You are advocating it is right and proper for political parties abuse power if another party did it before
That's not a complete characterization of my position. In general, people who behaved badly in the past (defected), must during their next turn in power behave pro-socially (cooperate). Otherwise, sliding continues even if only one party does it. Surely everyone can agree the sliding must stop. Enough time has passed to observe that defection continues even though some of the other "players" keep trying to cooperate. The only leverage available is defection. So the era of a Republican party of "comity, decorum, and norms" that people nostalgically pine for is over.
Continually raising the stakes, tit-for-tat in a race to the bottom that drags a whole country into its demise. There are norms that need to be upheld. There are norms that need to be rebuilt. And all parties have played a part in American democratic back-sliding.
Agreed, agreed, agreed, agreed.
But, pretending Trump is continuing at the established standard is farcical. I mean, it is a great gas lighting narrative to say Trump is just doing what Democrats already did, but it is not true.
If an assumed premise is "in every case", then, sure, it's not true. Trump is bound to do some things without reasonable precedent.
If it is not your love for MAGA then maybe it is your hate for US Democrats that is enabling you to endorse some gross anti-democratic behaviours and human rights transgressions. Certainly, concentration camps to "own the libs" is not an okay thing.
What it is, is that I almost don't care about Trump's outbursts and the way he talks shit. I don't care much that he's a buffoon, or that he degrades the dignity of his office. Sure, it's bad, but with aesthetics and appearances discounted to zero, that leaves concrete policy and executive actions.

The bogus "Russian Collusion" investigations and the concealment of Biden's infirmity were huge anti-democratic behaviours. The Iraq war and the destabilizations of Libya and Syria were huge human rights transgressions. None of those were mistakes. They were all things the "players" wanted to do. What would the path forward in Iran be if the Boltons and Frums of the world were influential in a Republican administration right now?

Illegal immigration in the US is an enforcement problem created by preceding administrations. It's a huge problem, such a huge problem that I can only identify one practical humane CoA: amnesty and rigorous future border control. The Trump administration has chosen enforcement without amnesty. Unless they back down, that requires funding and facilities and a lot more opportunities for civil rights violations. All that can be avoided if they just give the Democrats what Democrats want. Well, that's a problem, isn't it, and it's created by Democrats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QV
The bogus "Russian Collusion" investigations
Read the Mueller report, they found multiple contacts between the trump campaign and russian agents, they just couldn't establish that a crime occurred, due partially to obstruction of the investigation. There was smoke, they investigated the smoke, they couldn't prove the fire was a criminal act.
 
Read the Mueller report, they found multiple contacts between the trump campaign and russian agents, they just couldn't establish that a crime occurred, due partially to obstruction of the investigation. There was smoke, they investigated the smoke, they couldn't prove the fire was a criminal act.

Ah.. so innocent then.
 
Militarism is definitionally a characteristic of fascism. If there is no militarism, it isn't fascism.

Are you trying to invert the burden of proof? I'm not the one here, or elsewhere, that proposes the Army parade or a deployment of soldiers to support ICE or an illegal deportation is evidence that the US is heading toward fascism. One of my general points is that people read too much into events to fit their preconceptions.

The specific point about the parade was that it could also be construed as the "circuses" part of "bread and circuses" as evidence of plain ordinary populism. Or it could have been just a parade. I suppose what Trump is doing is mostly just populism with a bunch of aimless hip-shooting thrown in, but I don't care to try to make a solid case. Whatever it is, it's not going to become fascism.

If there are a bunch of important ways in which the administration and government and society as a whole are not trending fascist (eg. the coalescing of the judiciary, legislature, military, media, etc behind the great leader), and only scattered events that have other plausible explanations constituting weak evidence of characteristics of fascism if they are not widely and consistently repeated, then the most likely conclusion is the US is not becoming fascist.

If that's what you see, then just go on seeing it. You're not really going to be moved. My points are for the benefit of people disinclined to be alarmist.

I pretend nothing. Your beef here is just disagreement over subjectivity. I have repeatedly raised the things that should be categorized as grave abuses and mistakes.

When I expound a "tit-for-tat" position, I frame it in the context of politics and political norms, not morality or ethics. Is that clear enough?

That's not a complete characterization of my position. In general, people who behaved badly in the past (defected), must during their next turn in power behave pro-socially (cooperate). Otherwise, sliding continues even if only one party does it. Surely everyone can agree the sliding must stop. Enough time has passed to observe that defection continues even though some of the other "players" keep trying to cooperate. The only leverage available is defection. So the era of a Republican party of "comity, decorum, and norms" that people nostalgically pine for is over.

Agreed, agreed, agreed, agreed.

If an assumed premise is "in every case", then, sure, it's not true. Trump is bound to do some things without reasonable precedent.

What it is, is that I almost don't care about Trump's outbursts and the way he talks shit. I don't care much that he's a buffoon, or that he degrades the dignity of his office. Sure, it's bad, but with aesthetics and appearances discounted to zero, that leaves concrete policy and executive actions.

The bogus "Russian Collusion" investigations and the concealment of Biden's infirmity were huge anti-democratic behaviours. The Iraq war and the destabilizations of Libya and Syria were huge human rights transgressions. None of those were mistakes. They were all things the "players" wanted to do. What would the path forward in Iran be if the Boltons and Frums of the world were influential in a Republican administration right now?

Illegal immigration in the US is an enforcement problem created by preceding administrations. It's a huge problem, such a huge problem that I can only identify one practical humane CoA: amnesty and rigorous future border control. The Trump administration has chosen enforcement without amnesty. Unless they back down, that requires funding and facilities and a lot more opportunities for civil rights violations. All that can be avoided if they just give the Democrats what Democrats want. Well, that's a problem, isn't it, and it's created by Democrats.

The power of disinformation from major media corporations cannot be understated.
 
Back
Top